Schools Score Points by Standing Up for Workers
In the recent Super Bowl, the Steelers and Cardinals showed that, amid the marketing hype, big time sports still have the power to bring us unique moments of human drama. Also last week, in a less-visible but perhaps more significant action, perennial basketball contenders Duke and Georgetown showed that, with some exercise of moral leadership, those in the business of sports also have the power to advance human rights. Responding to news that Russell Athletic, a leading U.S. apparel manufacturer, had shut down a factory in Honduras in retaliation for workers having organized a union, the two schools, along with others such as Columbia, Miami, Rutgers and Wisconsin, announced that they are discontinuing the company's license to put their logos on its sweatshirts.
In a time when university endowments have been hard hit by market declines, forgoing licensing revenues could not have been easy. But the moral dimensions of the choice could not be clearer: Russell's violations of labor rights at its Honduran plants, where workers average less than $1.50 per hour, are the worst recently reported in Central America. Its recent decision to close the plant -- which was announced only days after workers rejected a four cent per day wage increase from the company -- followed prior incidents where the company fired over 140 workers for simply joining a union. Those earlier events prompted several schools that, like Duke and Georgetown, have codes of conduct concerning the rights of workers making their logo apparel to threaten termination of Russell's licenses -- until the company offered reinstatement with back-pay to employees.
Though Russell claimed to schools that the closure was due to the global economic crisis, two independent investigations in Honduras told a different story. Russell managers, including its regional H.R. director, on over 100 occasions, made statements indicating that the plant would close because workers formed a union. When asked by fellow managers if Russell would accept government mediation of the labor dispute, the regional director reportedly responded in the negative "at the same time that he ran his hand along his neck, making the traditional sign of beheading."
To make matters worse, because union leaders have been blamed for Russell's decision to close, they have faced death threats inside the plant and in their community. A petition seeking to protect their safety is before the OAS' Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.
To quote Yogi Berra, this is déjà vu all over again. When, in the mid-1990s, I and others in Congress criticized the lack of protections for workers -- here and abroad -- in trade deals being pressed with developing countries, we were told that U.S. trade and investment would raise labor standards and promote human rights because our companies would pursue responsible practices and advocate the rule of law. As the unlawful firings and, now, the retaliatory shutdown at Russell's Honduran plant show, the results for workers have been far less rosy.
In case after case, textile manufacturers like Russell, after shifting production to Central America, have fiercely resisted -- by means legal and illegal -- efforts by workers to form unions, just as they did for decades here in the United States. (Anyone remember Norma Rae?) Their intransigence has found fertile ground in countries like Honduras, where taking a stand for a basic right like joining a union has, too often, meant taking one's life in one's hands. The atmosphere of impunity is exacerbated by weak legal sanctions: even when government inspectors came around, Russell refused them entrance, with no more than a slap on the wrist.
That's why the universities' actions are so important. Russell has a code of conduct which is supposed to guarantee respect for worker rights. Evidently, such codes are just pieces of paper to companies like Russell, but they mean something more to those schools that recognize a responsibility to set an example of ethical leadership. Unless companies that violate such codes are held accountable, in a way that shows up on their bottom line, these commitments are just false promises to the workers they are supposed to protect.
In December, I wrote to Warren Buffett, the world's wealthiest man, and CEO of Russell's parent company, Berkshire Hathaway, asking him to look into this case. As of yet, Mr. Buffett has not replied. Maybe once a few more schools follow Duke and Georgetown, someone at Berkshire Hathaway will take notice.
David Bonior is Chairman of American Rights at Work. He served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1976 to 2002, including ten years as House Democratic Whip.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
As a student at the University of Southern California, which has a hefty contract with Russell Athletic, I'm concerned that our universities give such priority to contracts with these labor rights abusers. Using the economic crisis as a front to perpetuate its ongoing sweatshop abuses is disgusting (just like union busting)
What is wrong with the world today? The rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting comparatively poorer because of exploitation by companies like Russell. Does Warren Buffett have enough money yet, or does he need to continue to allow exploitation of workers in his companies so he and other managers can make bigger profits? The managers of Russell Athletics had no right to close their plant because they were afraid that they would have to actually start paying their workers decent wages and treating them fairly.
I'm kinda shocked Berkshire Hathaway would let Russell do this kind of stuff. Shutting down a whole plant just because workers wanted to join a union? Joshua B., this isn't about whether or not their pay is any good by local standards, it's about Russell trashing human rights. The schools seem to get that at least.
When you do the calculation these people were making the wage of a starting wage teacher down here, although I would have to see their working conditions, I would say that is not bad for often no or low skilled labor.
To expand of emmasmack's comment, the universities get to decide who to license as well as the consumers who purchase the goods and the students who attend these universities (who are also often the consumers), who are all part of what each logo/brand means. And thank goodness for students who are pressuring universities to change their (indirect) exploitative practices, and workers who are brave and hard-working to voice their concerns.
As far as rights of brands go, I strongly believe that Russell does not have the right to do what it pleases, especially at the expense of 18,000 workers, their families' health, well-being, and the right to fair labor conditions. They may have rights, but they also supposedly have code of ethics.
When will these companies learn!!! Its still amazing to me that companies think they can get away with abusing workers in their supply chain. Well now the whole world is watching Russell and so many of us will forever remember what they have done and think twice before we buy their products. One would think that in tough economic times, companies wouldn't intentionally destroy their repetition. I guess Russell has decided to learn the hard way because the one thing I've learned in the last 10 years, is that United Students Against Sweatshops won't go away until the wrongs have turned right!
It's a shame to see that, despite their code of conduct, Russell refuses to take any steps to ensure that the rights of workers in their factories are respected. Luckily, workers and students together are organizing to hold this company accountable. In addition to the schools already mentioned, four other schools have agreed to terminate their relationship with Russell (University of Miami, University of Wisconsin, University of Washington, and University of Houston).
Congratulations to all the students at these schools who have forced their administrations to do the right thing!
Go Rutgers! Set an example for other universities to follow -- every school should cut their contract with Russell as Russell Athletic is a serial abuser of workers rights.
Go Duke! And shout out to all the students who have been protesting on campus and getting their universities to take action.
I go to a school that used to purchase things from Russell Athletics. We have made it clear to Russell that we will not be able to purchase things from them in future because of this behavior they are engaged in. My school (Queen's University) just like many schools has a Code of a Conduct that people who use the school's logo agree to abide by. Illegal anti union activity like this clearly against these codes of conduct so Russell is really shutting themselves out of the University market by doing this.
This is a GREAT post and a very important campaign! I hope everyone will join David Bonior in expressing their concern. I sent an e-mail to Warren Buffett through USLEAP here: http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/1618/t/2586/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26360
Because of Russell's actions in Honduras, the company ended up on the International Labor Rights Forum's list of the five worst multinational corporations for union organizing. You can check that out here: http://www.laborrights.org/end-violence-against-trade-unions/resources/1871
Why not have all public universities be required to have their licensed merchandise manufactured in the state that pays for the university.......
contact your state senator with the idea
$1.50 an hour is actually decent pay in Honduras, especially relative to what these folks will be making without that job. Regarding unionization, why does a company not have a right to shut down the plant to avoid all the trouble, loss of profits, and possible violence that they would have to endure with a unionized workforce? Companies have rights to.
The schools aren't saying Russell wasn't allowed to close the factory -- they're saying that since Russell closed the factory, the universities don't want to do business with them anymore.
Sure, Russell has a right to do as it pleases, but it doesn't have the right to revenue from licensing with any particular university. The universities get to decide who the license to, and they can insist that the companies which produce their apparel respect the rights of workers.
There now is a price for the use of a university's logo that goes beyond dollars.
Sounds like Russell is the WalMart of athletic wear (WalMart closed down a butcher shop in one of its stores after the workers voted to unionize).
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
